Your RPG system sucks!

[Darkpriest]

I think the only problem i see with the stats is dychtomy between what they were meant to represent and how they are used in dialogs... might is used only as strenght and str intimidation choices. While it should be so much more.

[tls5669]

 

 

Your non-tanks are beyond squishy. Monks have to get hit in order to use their skills/powers? That's ****ing stupid beyond belief! Almost every fight my rogue/monk/wizard get dropped. The tanks can't hold aggro. It's just bad design all around. Yet again, this shows the major problem with paid betas when its the fanboys telling the devs what they want to hear instead of giving them the criticism they need to hear.

 

I think you are doing something wrong dude. My rogue, playing on hard: 

 

 

 

Alright, so.... having not played the game yet, how does one increase their attributes beyond what they initially are (I note you have 23 points spent on Attributes, more than is possible on character generation)?

 

Items?

Do you get to increase attributes on level up? (there's surprisingly little info on what exactly happens when one levels up)

Something else? (if it's story related please no spoilers other than simply saying 'story related')

 

I ask as it'll influence my character creation.

 

The one thing I dont like about the game. You cant ever raise the attribute points again, unless its by items. So if you have a sword that does say 21 max damage after the talents/abilities, the only way to increase damage is through "might" items.

[pedroantonio]

 

(...)And trying to manage a party of 6 in real-time combat is patently absurd - even at slow speed. All it does is result in spamming the space bar pauses. DOS is infinitely better with its turn-based combat.(...)

This one baffles me. You're a backer, and a kickstarter one, no less.

 

Have you played ANY of the games they repeated over and over they were gonna get inspiration from?

Do you know all of those games used real time with pause instead of turn based (and the pause was central to the gameplay, not some addendun for slow players)?

Did you even read the kickstarter?

And if you read it, and you didn't know how real time with pause plays, why didn't you investigate a bit before backing?

 

You must be a troll, nobody can be that stupid.

Edited March 29, 2015 by pedroantonio

[Hogfather]

 

IMO they definitely should change the way Might works and place the Magic bonuses on another stat, or make the responses class sensitive as is brilliantly suggested above.

 

From a RP point of view a Wizard really shouldn't be intimidating people with the strength and size of his muscles.

 

Okay, even if they could do the different strokes for different folks thing, because they can't, how is it a "brilliant" idea? And how is it a good roleplay option to say that Wizards can't possibly be strong and intimidating and therefore could never physically intimidate people? People aren't defined by their classes. They're supposed to be defined by their attributes and your roleplaying; your class is just an abstract set of rules that simulate your character's chosen adventuring career. It's like saying, "An accountant really shouldn't be intimidating people with the strength and size of his muscles." Not all Wizards are glass-boned elves with porcelain skin who dissolve into fairy dust in a stiff breeze. Not all Fighters are big hulking thugs in heavy armor swinging mattocks.

 

 

The problem is that the Might responses are very often specifically quite physical. Its not a good option to say that Wizards can't be physical, but its a very bad option to declare that they are in order to use their attribute's dialogue options if the intent is that Might != Strength! For example, my Priest's Mighty option earlier today was to pick someone up...

 

Its quite possible to have a threatening, mighty dialogue choice that is ambiguous as to the actual nature of the threat leaving the details to the player's imagination.

Edited March 29, 2015 by Hogfather

[JRRNeiklot]

I agree with the original poster.  The IE games never enforced an mmo  tank/healer/dps mechanic.  You could play with 5 wizards or 5 fighters or 5 clerics or 5 thieves.  For some reason Obsidian decided to base a game on the most reviled version of D&D ever.  I know 4e has its fans, but in a few years it will be dedicated to the dust bin next to Highlander 2.  Too bad, really.  POE could have been a great game.  It looks fantastic, and the story is adequate, but it's ruined by ****ty mechanics.  Maybe someone will make a D&D mod for it, until then, doesn't look like I'll be playing.  All this game does is make me appreciate the IE games that much more. 

Edited March 29, 2015 by JRRNeiklot

[View619]

The game is fine, if you want to play BG or IWD series then go play them. This game didn't need to copy-paste those mechanics to be great.

 

1. Having a front-line to hold back enemies while your remaining party members support has been a standard choice for table-top and CRPG games for years.
2. You don't have to sneak into battles at all, just don't expect to be able to do any form of pre-battle scouting if you don't. Same goes for finding traps, you're not forced to do anything.
3. Turning resting and spell restoration into a weighted decision instead of a no-brainer is a good thing. Props to OE for implementing the mechanics behind fatigue and an adventuring day so well.
4. I haven't seen a reason as to why you can't make varied parties. Having a tank or front-line soak up engagement while the rest of the characters go to town was pretty effective in the IE games too.

Edited March 29, 2015 by View619

[Moghra]

With 14 hours in, I'm having no problems on Hard, but I would much prefer a turn-based battle system instead of the current real-time implementation.  I am very happy with the game (was a kickstarter) but I just prefer the turn-based system since complex battles require incessant pausing which becomes cumbersome.

[JRRNeiklot]

 

1. Having a front-line to hold back enemies while your remaining party members support has been a standard choice for table-top and CRPG games for years.

 

Sure, but your damage output didn't scale inversely to your ability to TAKE damage.  The fighter has always been the best damage dealer, outside of AOE effects.  Now my fghter has to just sit there and take it up the ass while some squishy that dies from a spitball gets all the glory.  May as well be playing WoW.

[Valsuelm]

 

Might increasing magic damage is retarded.

 

They didn't call it strength for a reason

 

 

That has nothing to do with what I said.

 

While we're at it though, having physical strength and spiritual strength tied to the same stat is also retarded.

[Corivar]

 

The game is fine, if you want to play BG or IWD series then go play them. This game didn't need to copy-paste those mechanics to be great.

 

Maybe not, but the concept for this game was sold from the very beginning as the spiritual successor to those games. While I wouldn't go so far as to say the game sucks, I am disappointed. I like certain aspects of the game, ie the art design, sound, etc, but I have issues with the core gameplay to the point I simply don't find it enjoyable. The way xp is handled, stealth, combat only abilities, ai. endurance/HP, etc. I have no doubt that patches will address some of these, as will (hopefully) mods, but for the most part some things are here to stay. The game seems to be doing well and I am glad for that, and I know I am in the minority as a lot of people enjoy it, I just wish I did.

[zazei]

 

 

The game is fine, if you want to play BG or IWD series then go play them. This game didn't need to copy-paste those mechanics to be great.

 

Maybe not, but the concept for this game was sold from the very beginning as the spiritual successor to those games. While I wouldn't go so far as to say the game sucks, I am disappointed. I like certain aspects of the game, ie the art design, sound, etc, but I have issues with the core gameplay to the point I simply don't find it enjoyable. The way xp is handled, stealth, combat only abilities, ai. endurance/HP, etc. I have no doubt that patches will address some of these, as will (hopefully) mods, but for the most part some things are here to stay. The game seems to be doing well and I am glad for that, and I know I am in the minority as a lot of people enjoy it, I just wish I did.

 

Personally I think the game does play like a spiritual successor to Baldur's gate mixed with a bit of Icewind dale dungeon crawling (Endless dungeon). Learning the mechanics/reading the spell description and talents when leveling up certainly made me feel like I was learning Baldur's gate 2 all over again. Same feel as I had back when it was new and I had never heard of Forgotten realms.

 

I know Baldur's gate 2 had several different play styles but for me it was always a group effort in combat. My main character in Pillars is a human hunter and it's probably the character I micro manage the least in combat except for the tank. That doesn't make me care any less about her though since it's still my character and again, group effort. It's just the spell classes in these games always needed a bit more attention.

 

I'm not sure why people care so much about who does the damage when it's a six member party. Unlike wow where I still only control 'me' here I control everyone. All the companions are just as much mine as my hunter. 

[Medwynd]

Alright, so.... having not played the game yet, how does one increase their attributes beyond what they initially are (I note you have 23 points spent on Attributes, more than is possible on character generation)?

 

You can modify your starting stats with your chosen race (racial modifier) and cultures give an attribute bonus as well.

 

For example, my Death Godlike Wizard has:

Might: 18

Con: 8

Dex: 18

Per: 7

Int: 20

Resolve: 7

[barjed]

I enjoy the combat in PoE significantly more than I did in D&D2 games. I'd agree on one point - I, personally, would drop the 'per rest' skills and make them all 'per encounter'. Expendable spells made more sense in D&D games but here, with classes like the Cipher, who can spam spells during every encounter, not so much. This could be balanced by decreasing the number of uses in each spell level. But that again, are my personal feelings.

 

The other thing, which is a bit annoying - some of the buffs, Priests' in particular, could use a D&D like 'X hours' duration. I am not sure if having to buff your whole party with Accuracy boon every encounter brings anything to the table - decreasing the potency and making it last 8 hours would, to me, make more sense.

[yjzep]

yeah.  I have zero rogues, and 2 points max in sneak.  I don't sneak anything.  I have a proper formation.  Also, you have issues with tanks getting aggro and wizards being glass canons?  I don't see how using each member of a party to proper function is an issue.  "Limiting playstyle"?  No, it's not the kind of game where you can melee with your mages at no penalty.  Managing engagement is the whole point of the system.  It is decidedly different than BG.  So what.  Not BG. 

[AncientToaster]

I think adding per encounter spells and maybe cooldowns on certain skills would go a long way into making this battle system better.

 

I don't agree with the topic creator on most of his rants but I do acknowledge that the combat system isn't the greatest it could be.

[sim-h]

No please don't make the per rest abilities more frequent - that would remove more challenge and atmosphere from the game in my opinion. Currently using one of those abilities feels 'special'.

 

It's absolutely fine as it is. I don't see any problem whatsoever. I play on 'Hard' and am a veteran of BG and BG2.

 

It's just a new system and people who are used to other systems are taking time to get used to it. There are some great improvements over the cheese of the IE games.

 

Also, it will evolve some more I'm sure. I see no downside to single-character stealth, for example. Who is going to complain about that?? Nobody. Who is going to like it? 100% of people. Therefore I predict they will do it.

[MattSanderson]

On hard, the system has been really fun for me ~11 hours in. Lots of tactics, and I'm still learning more as I go along. I absolutely love the way all weapon types feel different, it's actually one of my favourite aspects of the system. 

[PrimeJunta]

I see a lot of complaints here along the lines of "I get killed a lot, therefore the system sucks." That's what's technically known as a "non sequitur." You get killed a lot because you suck at playing this game. That alone says nothing at all about the system in question.

 

Figure out how it works. Then criticize it. You can take notes from Sensuki.

[View619]

 

 

1. Having a front-line to hold back enemies while your remaining party members support has been a standard choice for table-top and CRPG games for years.

 

Sure, but your damage output didn't scale inversely to your ability to TAKE damage.  The fighter has always been the best damage dealer, outside of AOE effects.  Now my fghter has to just sit there and take it up the ass while some squishy that dies from a spitball gets all the glory.  May as well be playing WoW.

 

 

So, instead of one tank specialized in a purely defensive configuration, set up multiple front-line characters with armour for DR and weapon configurations for damage and spread the aggro around? You're not forced into having a purely defensive tank to manage all the aggression himself while everybody else deals the damage, that's just one style of playing. It just sounds like you're trying to force yourself into a specific style and it's boring you, so switch it up.

 

Before "optimal strategy" comes into the discussion, who cares. Enjoyment should come first.

 

 

 

 

The game is fine, if you want to play BG or IWD series then go play them. This game didn't need to copy-paste those mechanics to be great.

 

Maybe not, but the concept for this game was sold from the very beginning as the spiritual successor to those games. While I wouldn't go so far as to say the game sucks, I am disappointed. I like certain aspects of the game, ie the art design, sound, etc, but I have issues with the core gameplay to the point I simply don't find it enjoyable. The way xp is handled, stealth, combat only abilities, ai. endurance/HP, etc. I have no doubt that patches will address some of these, as will (hopefully) mods, but for the most part some things are here to stay. The game seems to be doing well and I am glad for that, and I know I am in the minority as a lot of people enjoy it, I just wish I did.

 

 

I feel like it lives up to the claim of being a spiritual successor while being a unique experience. That being said, I can understand that not everybody is going to enjoy some of the core game-play decisions; I can only hope that mods will be available so you can tweak it to your personal preference.

 

You can take a look at the IE mod and see if it has anything you like, I'm certainly using it for a few things (primarily loot manipulation and the removal of movement recovery).

Edited March 29, 2015 by View619

[Aqvamare]

Actually, you can play this game in 6 wizzard, 6 chanter, 6 cipher setup.

 

If a class is DPS, Tank or (Heal) is only a question about your stats they have at beginning.

 

A tank wizard with defensive skill and cast will have around 150-170 deflection, the highest deflection in game, means he is nearly immun to physic attacks.

And still can use level 6 cast syrcle of death, 1000 raw damage, uneflected by might or int in damage numbers.

 

A heal wizard use the 50 to everythink geal and heals with a overshild, and can boost 1 targets number in the other deflections stats .

 

And DPS wizard is DPS wizard...wizards can kill groups before they even reach you.

 

......

 

 

6 chanter would look like 6 different chants to debuff, buff and damage, working on each of them, and summon 6 pets all the time, at beginning, 6 phantoms will stunlock everythink....

 

If tankskilled, a chanter will have around 110 deflection, less than a similar skilled wizard, but on exact sam level like warrior. With fear debuff or anti accurcy, they get nearl immun, too.

 

And when phantoms starts to become weak, they can switch to a ****ing dragon....with 260 health, weaker def stats than phantom, but 1 Fireblast and 2 knockback, given enough time for chanter to recast the dragon when his health runs low.

 

...........................

 

About cipher, nothing to tell...there charm will simply kill everythink, and in tank stats specc, they tank good enough. And there last level spell is RAW wound damage like wizard and complety indepedent from might.

 

...............................

 

All the other class can do the same.

 

In this game your role in party is not decided by your  class...it is decided by your choosing stats, talents and race (a dwarf with anti posion and illness race talent is better tank than a non dwarf), because it prevents a debuff with -40 to deflection.

[Skor]

I see a lot of complaints here along the lines of "I get killed a lot, therefore the system sucks." That's what's technically known as a "non sequitur." You get killed a lot because you suck at playing this game. That alone says nothing at all about the system in question.

 

Figure out how it works. Then criticize it. You can take notes from Sensuki.

 

Thats not what I'm seeing at all.  I see a lot of detailed reasons why certain aspects are significantly wonky and don't make sense.

[Halsy]

That's right, they are my opinions and the further I get into the game the more I stand by them. Maybe it comes from being to set in my ways of playing D&D for 30 years, but I *really* don't like the system they've designed for all the aformentioned issues and more. However, like I said, the art and the wriring are exellent so I'll push through and finish it. I actually applaud Obsidian for at least tryng to shake things up. They just failed miserably at it IN MY OPINION. Disagree? Cool. I wasn't asking for feedback, just letting Obsidian know what I think. If you love it, then tell them, don't tell me.

[View619]

 

I see a lot of complaints here along the lines of "I get killed a lot, therefore the system sucks." That's what's technically known as a "non sequitur." You get killed a lot because you suck at playing this game. That alone says nothing at all about the system in question.

 

Figure out how it works. Then criticize it. You can take notes from Sensuki.

 

Thats not what I'm seeing at all.  I see a lot of detailed reasons why certain aspects are significantly wonky and don't make sense.

 

 

 

Taken from the OP 

 

"Your non-tanks are beyond squishy. Monks have to get hit in order to use their skills/powers? That's ****ing stupid beyond belief! Almost every fight my rogue/monk/wizard get dropped. The tanks can't hold aggro. It's just bad design all around. Yet again, this shows the major problem with paid betas when its the fanboys telling the devs what they want to hear instead of giving them the criticism they need to hear."

 

"The spell system and spells themselves are terrible. Fights happen so fast that de/buffs are basically pointless because the fight is over by the time the spell is cast. It also makes most food/potions/scrolls useless in that regard as well. The spell times should be instant - seeing as you get so few spells to actually cast anyway and mana doesn't play a factor. And durations on all that stuff should be upped by a factor of 10 at least. I should be able to have those buffs going for an entire map. Otherwise, it's just camping after every encounter - and that's way too expensive at low levels."

 

Sure, there are some arguments regarding specific player preferences on "why certain aspects are significantly wonky and make no sense" but a lot of it is "I don't understand how this game works and keep getting dropped".  

 

 

That's right, they are my opinions and the further I get into the game the more I stand by them. Maybe it comes from being to set in my ways of playing D&D for 30 years, but I *really* don't like the system they've designed for all the aformentioned issues and more. However, like I said, the art and the wriring are exellent so I'll push through and finish it. I actually applaud Obsidian for at least tryng to shake things up. They just failed miserably at it IN MY OPINION. Disagree? Cool. I wasn't asking for feedback, just letting Obsidian know what I think. If you love it, then tell them, don't tell me.

 

 

 

If you don't want discussion, don't post on a forum? You could always send a direct email to OE if you don't want feedback.

Edited March 29, 2015 by View619

[Rumsteak]

I disagree with the OP. I was skeptical about this system during the beta stage, but so far after 18 hours on normal I'm having a great time.

Mostly spent my Saturday afternoon fooling around in Raedric's hold with a party of 3 at level 3, by going through all the entrances. The front entrance was ...challenging, but rewarding.

 

I open however I want with my druid+mage aoe debuffs/spells, or just with some bow+arbalest shots. Doesn't feel boring at all.

 

Not sure I would be having a great time if I didn't know some game basic mechanics though! Positioning is important and IMO adds some spice to the game. Being in stealth mode allows finer positioning so I'm fine with that. Then what's really interesting to me is casting the right spell according to the enemy defense. I love that. If the guys has a weak reflex, just blast them with spells that attack reflex like fire spells. Weak fortitude? Why not try some of my druid's aoe tailored for that. If they don't seem to have a particular weak spot, or if you don't know their weak spot, or if you want to optimize damage output in tough situations, casting a debuff spell (like one that hobbles enemies and make them weak to reflex) then casting a corresponding damage spell works wonders. See? So many options to choose from. Depending on what enemy you encounter, you will attack differently. This is the contrary of bland and boring.

 

I've "wasted" all my Saturday on this game. Combat is frigging amazing. And I didn't mention all the dialogues and graphics that give a nice BG feel. Obsidian, don't change a thing!

Edited March 29, 2015 by Rumsteak

[vistani]

I'm not that far in but I picked this up when I seen it released and hadnt heard anything about it prior to that in like 2 years just because I loved BG, IWD, etc.  So far, I love this too.. sorta wish that perception or something spotted secrets when I wasnt sneaking but whatever, the game speed thing works fine.  As for everything else..  I adore my cipher so far and all the classes feel nice with unique mechanics though I haven't tried a monk yet but the classes overall seem to have more customization than the old black isle games did.  I love the stash and all the ease of use features like hiring at the inn.. idk that theres nothing for me to complain about but I'm having a hard tme finding it so far.